PATRICK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri May-16-08 09:39 AM
Response to Original message |
|
being so close in the delegate contest would make her nearly a mandatory choice. ALL things aside and looking at the basic rules in wise Veep selection, she is not a good match. She competes with Obama and is not going to be a compatible team player. More importantly, she harms the ticket among independents and crossover Republicans. Arkansas is not much to attract "balance". Dems already attract the women's vote. Hillary could try to undo the damage she has done there without being the VP nominee, but in the campaign it is not too clear what kind of help she(and Bill) will be in taking orders from the Obama camp and not being the willing or unwilling focus of extremely manipulative MSM attention. Automatic harm will be done in playing HRC off against Obama or distracting and enlisting GOP enthusiasm against the ticket. That alone is solid guarantee. Her "experience" touting has already taken major hits or derailing.
Obama is strong in his own right but really cannot afford to carry a continuing rival into the cheat machine and then to the WH where traditionally Veeps are buried alive, but in this case the MSM will likely continue to ferret out dissent and division and distraction. As for Latinos, this would be better served with the experienced Richardson who would not be particularly perceived as mainly a "historic" first. The woman issue, only with the help of Hillary disabusing her loyal base, could be served by Karen Sebelius, but in any case the VP selection should be 100% compatible with Obama and be seen as a solid possible replacement and complement to the work needed to be done. With ALL the work to be done we need each cabinet member to be strong for the concepts and the team. The certainties of harm outweigh the maybes of benefit and the rivalries will be cemented in place instead of real healing beneath the show of unity.
Hillary's dilemma, which she did not want or plan for, is whether to continue a scorched earth pursuit of the number spot, now lost, seamlessly into the fight for number two- which has rarely ever been a fight at all and the choice of the presidential nominee. Such a fight will openly signal the beginning of a an "undream" ticket which will crumble all but her most fanatical support and worse in November. She should waste no time herself in facing realities. She has little time or room to salvage anything from her efforts and the price she must pay upfront is the Veep selection AND enthusiastically undoing all the harm. Personally this is not much for her efforts, but much for the greater good of party and nation and world. In the end that would be to her greatest credit as well, something she has not seen all too clearly in the pursuit of the presidency.
|
| -Regardless of how you feel about her, do you think Clinton is a good strategic choice for VP? |
Onlooker |
May-16-08 09:18 AM |
#0 |
-
Being a former Republican is "impressive credentials"? |
wienerdoggie |
May-16-08 09:19 AM |
#1 |
 -
Strategically speaking |
Onlooker |
May-16-08 09:22 AM |
#6 |
  -
would not help Obama get elected and would contradict his no lobbyist policy |
WillYourVoteBCounted |
May-16-08 10:51 AM |
#55 |
 -
Yes........ |
RichGirl |
May-16-08 10:06 AM |
#38 |
-
No. We need independents to beat McCain. She will repel many |
Old Crusoe |
May-16-08 09:20 AM |
#2 |
-
Hillary as VP would make a mockery of everything Obama has accomplished |
rocknation |
May-16-08 09:20 AM |
#3 |
-
No. Someone w/ foreign policy-diplomatic experience would be better... |
elehhhhna |
May-16-08 09:21 AM |
#4 |
-
I can understand both perspectives |
Sherman A1 |
May-16-08 09:21 AM |
#5 |
 -
Democrats would like it, and I wouldn't object |
eridani |
May-16-08 10:02 AM |
#35 |
-
There certainly are some strengths to the choice, primarily |
mmonk |
May-16-08 09:22 AM |
#7 |
-
Possibly. Pros and cons to it. |
PeterU |
May-16-08 09:22 AM |
#8 |
 -
This quote disturbs me |
Zodiak Ironfist |
May-16-08 09:50 AM |
#28 |
 -
You are right. |
RichGirl |
May-16-08 10:14 AM |
#41 |
-
NO, NO, NO, NO... AND NADA! |
ChiciB1 |
May-16-08 09:24 AM |
# |
-
No, absolutely not. |
Hepburn |
May-16-08 09:24 AM |
#9 |
-
No. |
harun |
May-16-08 09:25 AM |
# |
-
I don't. Many of the reasons have been stated by others here. To go over |
NC_Nurse |
May-16-08 09:25 AM |
#10 |
 -
He needs Foreign/Military experience on the ticket to counter McCain |
NotThisTime |
May-16-08 09:29 AM |
#13 |
-
Exactly. She and Bill could have some official or unofficial positions with the |
NC_Nurse |
May-16-08 09:32 AM |
#17 |
-
No. |
lojasmo |
May-16-08 09:26 AM |
#11 |
-
No. Unless you want eight more years of Clinton obsession by the media. |
DemItAllAnyway |
May-16-08 09:29 AM |
#12 |
-
The best strategy would be for her to just go back to the Senate. |
Gidney N Cloyd |
May-16-08 09:30 AM |
#14 |
 -
She could really make a difference in the Senate |
goclark |
May-16-08 10:36 AM |
#44 |
-
NO! |
redqueen |
May-16-08 09:30 AM |
#15 |
-
It is not a good strategy to tie an anchor to one's waist while swimming. |
Tierra_y_Libertad |
May-16-08 09:30 AM |
#16 |
-
NO |
havocmom |
May-16-08 09:32 AM |
#18 |
-
Fuck no! |
backscatter712 |
May-16-08 09:33 AM |
#19 |
-
A down-ticket chainsaw massacre. nt |
billyoc |
May-16-08 09:33 AM |
#20 |
-
Not a good strategic choice at all for two practical reasons |
newmajority |
May-16-08 09:35 AM |
#21 |
-
No. It undercuts the "change" message with an eye to the past |
SoonerPride |
May-16-08 09:35 AM |
#22 |
-
Ordinarily |
PATRICK |
May-16-08 09:39 AM |
#23 |
-
Yes |
MonkeyFunk |
May-16-08 09:41 AM |
#24 |
 -
Can you elaborate as to why you think that? |
Lucky 13 |
May-16-08 09:46 AM |
#26 |
-
First and most obvious - |
MonkeyFunk |
May-16-08 09:54 AM |
#30 |
-
Honestly, objectively, the answer is NO. |
Lucky 13 |
May-16-08 09:45 AM |
#25 |
 -
Agree with your reasons, but think we need a woman governor. |
sfam |
May-16-08 10:03 AM |
#36 |
-
I respect and agree with your argument, but think that impact will be small. |
Lucky 13 |
May-16-08 11:06 AM |
#56 |
-
If you want the General Election to be all about .... |
earthside |
May-16-08 09:50 AM |
#27 |
 -
No, it would reinforce the everybody is a winner nobody loses, ie we can't make tough decisions. n/t |
CK_John |
May-16-08 09:57 AM |
#33 |
-
No, there are better options..need to go west.. |
tokenlib |
May-16-08 09:51 AM |
#29 |
-
## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ## |
DU GrovelBot |
May-16-08 09:54 AM |
#31 |
-
Are you kidding? Clinton = Albatross. |
Kitsune |
May-16-08 09:55 AM |
#32 |
-
No. The right wing whackjobs will come out to vote against her in droves |
eridani |
May-16-08 10:01 AM |
#34 |
-
Sure, if you want to see the heads of Obama supporters explode. |
WinkyDink |
May-16-08 10:04 AM |
#37 |
-
absolutely Not!!!!!!!!!! You end up with the package deal - Bill (and Monica) come along as |
NRaleighLiberal |
May-16-08 10:06 AM |
#39 |
-
No |
Liberal Gramma |
May-16-08 10:07 AM |
#40 |
-
Im on the wall on this one |
BigD_95 |
May-16-08 10:21 AM |
#42 |
 -
Hillary brought corrupt union chiefs . .. |
BearSquirrel2 |
May-16-08 10:44 AM |
#52 |
-
Strategic? Better to maintain "strategic majority" in the US Senate. |
suston96 |
May-16-08 10:32 AM |
#43 |
-
No, she is not ... |
BearSquirrel2 |
May-16-08 10:36 AM |
#45 |
-
Not looking at personal like or dislike |
marlakay |
May-16-08 10:39 AM |
#46 |
-
No, just the opposite |
pbca |
May-16-08 10:39 AM |
#47 |
-
I did at one time. |
graywarrior |
May-16-08 10:40 AM |
#48 |
-
absolutely NOT--he wants someone to attract voters, not drive them away |
ima_sinnic |
May-16-08 10:42 AM |
#49 |
-
No because 1) she has already said Obama isn't ready to be commander in chief |
book_worm |
May-16-08 10:43 AM |
#50 |
-
NO NO NO NO NO |
cliffordu |
May-16-08 10:43 AM |
#51 |
-
No x 1000000.00 |
olkaz |
May-16-08 10:47 AM |
#53 |
-
RE: VP |
cjsmom44 |
May-16-08 10:48 AM |
#54 |
-
Hell Noooooooooooooooooooooo eom |
spokane |
May-16-08 11:07 AM |
#57 |
-
I think her posiitves are canceled out for the most part by her negatives. |
Lisa0825 |
May-16-08 11:08 AM |
#58 |
-
She would completely doom the ticket. |
BlooInBloo |
May-16-08 11:09 AM |
#59 |
-
no no no no no no no... |
dkf |
May-16-08 11:10 AM |
#60 |
-
Nyet... |
Clear Blue Sky |
May-16-08 11:10 AM |
#61 |
-
Honestly, no. |
Terran |
May-16-08 11:16 AM |
#62 |
-
Of Course She Is. It's The Best Scenario Out There For Us. Those Saying Otherwise Use Foolish |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME |
May-16-08 11:16 AM |
#63 |
-
No - a VP doesn't typically have that much impact |
karynnj |
May-16-08 11:23 AM |
#64 |
-
Are you freakin' nuts! Obama will lose a lot of votes if he takes Hillary as VP. . . |
InAbLuEsTaTe |
May-16-08 11:24 AM |
#65 |